Sexy Widget

oTxt SMS Widget – A Review

After reading about oTxt on Mashable, I decided to take the oTxt SMS widget for a spin.  oTxt is a widget based service that allows users to receive text messages on their mobile phone from visitors to their blog or social networking profile, without disclosing their telephone number.  The service lets you set a max budget of texts you will receive per day, week, or month.

Interestingly, the oTxt Web discloses nothing about who the corporate presence is behind this widget.  The entire purpose of the site is to crank out widgets – there are no other distractions on the site.

Applications and Opportunity

I’ve been trying to get my head around exactly who would need this neat little service.  My friends already have my cell phone number – they could just text me directly.  Given the amount of email spam I get from strangers, I’m not sure if I’d be crazy about opening up my cell phone to unsolicited loan and prescription drug offers, especially if it’s on my dime. 

But there may be a market in between the friend zone, and the stranger zone.  When I think about LinkedIn, or MySpace, or RateItAll, I have a bunch of folks in my networks who I don’t know well enough to know their cell phone numbers, but who would be unlikely to spam my phone with texts.

More specifically, this oTxt sweet spot might lie in that zone of acquaintances illustrated by online social networks via degrees of separation.

In other words, oTxt would seem to be a great fit for a social network with some privacy protection.  I’d love to see oTxt integrated into one of the big social networks so that I could decide who had access to this feature – just my friends, friends of friends, or maybe even three degrees out.  By linking oTxt with social networking functionality, it becomes more interesting.  It puts me in control of who can send me text messages, not just how many text messages I will receive before the cap hits.

Testing and Configuration

Maybe it’s because I had just finished wading through the confusing U-Lik, but I found the widget configuration process on oTxt to be as simple as can be.  First of all, the configuration fields are right on the home page.  There’s a screenshot right there of exactly what the widget will look like.  There’s no searching for the right link, or getting distracted by other content, or trying to figure out exactly what this widget does.  If you go to the oTxt Web site, you are immediately thrust into the flow of creating a very intuitive widget.  It’s fantastic.

The process is pretty simple – you enter in your cell phone number and email address, select your service provider, choose your default message (e.g. Send me a text!), and set your daily / weekly / monthly text message budget.  The service than sends you a confirmation code which you plug into the widget configuration tool.  oTxt then spits out a Flash based widget which will work on any blogging platform, and just about any social network.

You can adjust the width of the widget by going into the code – I did find that it didn’t reduce very well to a width of 175 px, but that’s probably not such a big deal given that social networks would appear to the most likely destination.

The only problem that I had with this whole process is that the oTxt service sent me three different confirmation codes – one that worked, and two that didn’t.  It was just a matter of going through my text messages and trying all three until I found the correct one.  oTxt, if you’re reading, you owe me $0.20 for the two extra texts – feel free to contribute to the SW beer fund through the Chipin widget in the right column.

Editorial

In terms of operational widget execution, I think oTxt really nails it.  The configuration process couldn’t be simpler.  They did the branding right.  They have a nice backlink separated out from their Flash widget.  They chose the right format for their target demographic.  They’ve built a widget from a concept that most people easily grasp.

However, as a standalone service, I’m not completely sold on oTxt’s prospects.  They could very well prove me wrong and see massive adoption from MySpace’ers who want to provide another channel for the cute guy / girl to say hello.  But as it stands today, I worry about the spam factor ruining this neat little service, or at least slowing adoption down.

However, as mentioned earlier, if oTxt can somehow tie this service into the protections afforded by social network style degrees of separation, they could put the user in control of this service – and go a long way towards solving the problem of spam, cost, and privacy.

Feel free to send me a text via the oTxt widget in the right column.  But please, no loan, porn, or drug offers.  I get plenty of those already.

U-Lik Widget – a Review

U-Lik is an online collection tool for consumer preferences that allows users to rate people, products, places, etc., and then display those likes via a widget on their blogs.

U-Lik’s value proposition is to house a collection of likes of a user, provide the tools to broadcast those likes, and to facilitate introductions to other people who share those likes.

As I am a founder of RateItAll – which could be considered a direct competitor - it’s going to be pretty tough for me to give an unbiased review of this company / widget.  Please keep this in mind as you read my analysis.

Applications & Opportunity

I have long argued to anyone who will listen that the Internet landscape is crying out for a Wikipedia of opinion based content – in fact, I was even arguing this before there was a Wikipedia.  My argument has been that the consumer review / opinion space is hopelessly fragmented, and that there is a real opportunity for a single player to come along and build the be all, end all site of consumer opinion covering not just products, but people, places, ideas, culture, etc.  Just as Google consolidated search, and eBay consolidated auctions, and Walgreen’s consolidated the fragmented drug store landscape, and Supercuts consolidated the fragmented barber shop scene, I think that a single company will rise to be the preferred destination for structured online opinions.

I still believe this, and it would appear that I-Lik does as well.

The widget aspect is a very important piece of this vision, as people have demonstrated that they will use widgets that display what they like (iLike, Last.FM, etc.).  I see no reason why this behavior wouldn’t extend to things like travel, people, and maybe, products.  Properly executed, these widgets should provide the bulk of I-Lik’s customer acquisition and marketing.

Configuration & Testing

I found U-Lik’s home page to be pretty confusing.  The main mission statement referred to “sharing my virtual library,” but that didn’t really mean anything to me.  I looked in vain for an About page that would tell me more about what I was supposed to do, but I couldn’t find one.  The only reason that I persisted until I found the widget was because I had read on Widgetoko that it existed.

Once I logged in, I just started searching for stuff that I liked.  I was able to pull up a band, a movie, a city, etc.  Some of my more obscure searches didn’t return any results, and I was invited to create a listing for that page.  U-Lik is about users creating listings, which can then be shared with other users both on the U-Lik site, and across the blogosphere.  It’s a nice model.

Once I had accumulated a few things in my library, I clicked on the link in the header that said “My Library on My Blog.”  This generated a snippet of JavaScript.  There were no configuration options, but the default widget does fit nicely into the sidebar.  The widget seems to insert some extra space below it (see my right sidebar).

In terms of the widget itself, I would recommend a background color and some clearer branding.  Having a “share” option doesn’t work so well with this widget, as by definition, the U-Lik widget is very personalized.

Editorial

Because of my obvious conflict of interest with this particular widget, I’m not going to spend much time on editorializing about U-Lik’s prospects, or making in depth recommendations about what they could do better.

I think they have a good idea, but I think they’re execution is a bit confusing.  I will be watching them with interest :)

Widget Interview with Lee Odden

Lee Odden of Top Rank Online Marketing just published an interview that we did as a follow-up to my recent Pubcon widget presentation.

Click through for the full widget interview.

Building a Widget? Read this First.

I had the opportunity to speak at Pubcon last week on the viral marketing panel on a lineup that included Rand Fishkin (SEOMoz), Aaron Wall (Seo Book and Clientside), and Louise Rijk (Advanced Media Productions).  It was a solid panel, and I was flattered to be up there with Aaron and Rand – who I have long considered to be two of the best minds in the biz.

Not surprisingly, I devoted my entire presentation to widgets – specifically, how widgetizing your Web site is an important step towards giving your users the tools to help your business go viral.

In preparing for this presentation, I went through all of the widgets and widget related businesses that I have grokked for Sexy Widget, and I came up with five principles that every widgetmaster should consider while laying out the specs for their widget.

1)    Accessibility

It sounds like a no brainer, but make sure that you choose a format for your widget that works for the demographic you are trying to reach.  If you are trying to reach MySpace’ers, don’t make a JavaScript widget.  If you have a widget that will be used primarily in blog sidebars, make sure it fits in a blog sidebar.  Don’t be like these guys, or these guys.

2)    Customization

Every widgetmaster will have to navigate the tightrope between making their widget easy to grab, and providing widget customization options such as colors, styles, dimensions, and customized output code for each of the primary widget aggregators (MySpace, Bebo, TypePad, etc.).  Ajax preview tools will help your users visualize what their widget will look like before taking the time copy and paste it in.  Some folks who I think have done an especially good job with this are Widgetbox and Tourb.us:

3)    Content / Experience

Will your widget provide a snapshot of content / links, or will it provide an embedded experience?  In either case, most Web sites will have to make their choices carefully, based on their target market, and based on the most likely destination for their widget (blogs vs. SNS).  What aspect of your Web site’s content or functionality is most likely to work in a small piece of real estate?  What aspect will be easiest to understand?  What aspect is most likely to make viewers want to grab it and put it on their own sites?  As time goes on, I expect all widgets to move towards a more integrated, contextually aware experience.  To better understand what I mean by embedded experience, check out Bitty Browser if you haven’t already.

4)    Branding

To me, widgets are all about extending your site (and brand’s) reach beyond the confines of your domain.  Clearly, you don’t want to miss the branding opportunity afforded by the potential proliferation of your content all over the Web.  But at the same time, you don’t want to overbrand and make your widget look like an ad.  While this is a subjective area, I do have strong opinions on this.  I think that the ThisNext widget is very elegantly branded.  I think that the FavoriteThingz widget is overbranded.  I think the Snipperoo brand is too tough to read, and I like the way that ChipIn provides a tab that lets the viewer learn more about ChipIn within the body of the widget.

5)    Sharing

In terms of viral marketing, this is the big one.  When someone sees your widget on another site, how easy do you make it for them to grab it and put it on their own site?  Do you force them to click through to your site to grab the code?  Do you force them to click through and register (shudder)?  Can you grab the code right from the body of the widget?  Or are you blessed enough to be able to provide one click adds for your widget?  Streampad does a nice job of letting folks grab widget code right from the player.

(One area that I intentionally ignore in these five principles is the backlink potential associated with a successful widget execution.  The SEO implications of having a successful widget are massive.  I don’t know of another medium with a comparable potential for organic, one way, inbound links with customizable anchor text.  From what I've seen, none of the mainstream widgets have solved this yet, though I've heard whispers from savvy guys like Receptional and Oilman of people doing creative things in this area. This merits its own post, I think.)

Play Conference - User Generated Content Panel

**This is not a widget post.**

So I was not going to post this, as it doesn't really have anything to do with widgets.  But when I saw the Berkeley Play Conference mildly misreported on Valleywag, I figured it should go up, as I was there, and I made an effort to capture most of what was said.

Valleywag called the UGC panel an embarrassment to Michael Arrington because he accidentally pulled up Twitter just after Stewart Butterfield posted  this:

Every time I hear "UGC", a little part of me -- and everything I've ever believed in -- dies.

It was actually Evan Williams from Obvious Corp who said this during the panel.  Stewart just posted what Evan had said.  The only bit of conflict (and it was more humor than conflict), came when somebody posted on Twitter (right before Mike pulled it up) about the mild smackdown that occurred during the panel between Mike and Evan over TechCrunch's reporting of Twitter (see below).

Anyway, here are my reactions and notes from the UGC panel:

I'm at the Berkeley Play Conference, attending the User Generated Content panel.

The panel got a little bogged down in semantics - specifically, what's the definition of UGC - but overall it was worthwhile.

A few observations - say what you want about Mike Arrington, but he's a heck of a presence.  He's brash and cocky enough to really push the panelists, which makes for a more interesting discussion.  He seems to relish butting heads with people and not really care how folks react.

Evan Williams' signal to noise ratio is very high.  He didn't say much, but everything he said had value.  I wish he had said more. 

Mary Hodder had her A game today.  Her and Evan appeared to be unphased by the moderator's swagger.

The Mozes back channel was a total distraction.  Berkeley should scrap this - it's not fair to the panelists.

Here's the play by play (paraphrased):

The panelists are Evan Williams from Odeo / Twitter, Jeff Roberto from Friendster, Mary Hodder from Dabble, Jamie Perlman from Snocap, Micki Krimmel from Revver, and Jack Kloster fom sports social network Yardbarker.  Mike Arrington is the moderator.

Company intros.

Revver - 20% payout for distributed embeds of video.  (monetizing widgets).  Remainder is split between publisher and Revver.

Mike's opening comment: " User Generated Content is something that I used to think was great."

Mike: The videos watched on YouTube are copyrighted, not user generated.  YouTube is little more than a way for people to watch professionally generated content. 

Mike: I will challenge you (the panelists) to convince me that I am wrong.  Revver is my primary target, as they have no copyrighted content. 

Micki: Every video on Revver reviewed by people to check for copyrights and hate speak.

Diet Coke and Mentos video case study.  3 weeks the video made $35K from advertising.  Then Mentos reached out, video up to $80K.  Total revenue brought on by Revver?  Not telling.

Mike: Exception that proves the rule.  If you look at MySpace, they are now being sued  by Universal.  UGC is a red herring, it's really about copyrighted content.  What does the rest of the panel think?

(implication: is revver making any money with a pure UGC play?)

Jamie / Snocap: Born out of the problems of Napster.  Need to treat content the way the copyright holders want it tto be treated.

Snocap has registration of four major record labels, protecting the content.  Distributed model.

Evan: UGC doesn't mean anything. (i think he said the quote about "dying a little more" here)

Mike: You abandoned UGC at Odeo.  It means non professional content.  Now you're bringing in NPR (?) stuff.

Mike: Facebook is a counter example.  Profiles are content.  You panelists should have come up with this.

Audience: Craigslist too.

Mary: it's like looking at Blogs five years ago, when nobody was making money.  Now people are making money.  People will learn how to make money in this new medum.

Mike: I was booed off stage at the journalist convention when i told them to stop what you're still doing, and go independent.  I believe that.  If you're good, don't work for other people.  UGC moves to professional as the cream rises to the top.

Mike: Friendster is doing well again.

Jeff / Friendster; We opened everything up.  People can now embed stuff, and then Friendster makes it searchable on Google or Yahoo.  Shifting to an open model, as some networks try and close up.

(implication: Jeff sees MySpace's blocking of widget providers as an opportunity for Friendster)

Mike: Is it true that Friendster almost bought Facebook?

Mike: Yes.

Mike: I heard it was less than $10M.

Mike: I like Newsvine because of the comments.  THe conversation piece is interesting. 

Jack / Yardbarker - that's what we do.  Participants feel like they know more than the experts. 

Evan.  What does user mean?

Mike.  To me it's pretty clear.  TechCrunch is user generated content.  I'm just a guy with a blog. 

Mike.  Some of the best content is private.   I didn't join Twitter because everything was public.  If it's private, you can't generate massive page views.

Evan: You misreported.  You've always been able to make stuff private on Twitter.

Mike: UGC Model breaks.  Ross Levinsohn - said he likes all free content, which can be monetized.  But the best stuff is private.  Is there a business model for private stuff?

Mary: Good example is Grouper.  Originally Grouper was private content, then relaunched as public.  In between place - semi private interactions, but majority of content is public. 

Evan - Gmail is private but makes money from advertising - I assume they make money.

Mary - your assumption that advertising has to stay in the broadcast mode.  It shouldn't be a spray.  What about the deep, contextual advertising that hits the right 5 people.  It's hard to do, but it will happen.

Smackdown over Mike's inaccurate coverage of Twitter when Mike pulls up Twitter on the screen.

Mike: we've gone on a tangent that i don't like.  Definition of UGC.  Let's say it exists, that there is some line when it turns professional.  Who are the long term users if this trend continues?

Mary: they will survive if they do the filters and editing.  Trusted filters are as valuable as content creators.  Small percentage are good content creators, small percentage are good filters.

Mike: Can the NYT compete against Digg?

Jamie / Snocap - assumption is that there is only room for one editor.  (quotes somebody else) Long tail - it's not a long tail for me.  For me, it's tier one content.  There is room for more filters than just one mainstream one.

Micki - I will never stop going to the movies, cause i enjoy the experience.

Jack / Yardbarker - NYT becomes validators, not producers.

Mike: if Digg takes on in other verticals it's game over.

Evan: but where would Digg point?

Mike: great point.  To Techcrunch, to journalists in the field.

Mary - we still need reporters, folks need to collect the info.  Value of NYT is to turn into a filter of content.  It would be bad if all the trusted media feeds away.

Mike: why?  what about Fox News?

Mary: there's access issues.  Live access to press conferences.  Bloggers can't all fit.

Question from audience: what defines content quality.  Who decides.  Example wikipedia.  How do you define quality.

Micki: I like the inherent distrust in social media.

Mary: when i look at wikipedia, i feel like i get the picture.  In the blogosphere, we tend to be news junkies, can handle unlimited amount of content.  I like the option of Wikipedia to give one concise summary.

Mike: what if every story of the NYT was filed, like Digg.  And you can read what you like.  Would it work?  OF course it would.

Micki - frightening that you only see what your friends like.

Question: how does social media take care of the lazy person?

Mary: Digg fails be being too much.  NO filtering of the filtering.  Other issue is that Digg is a game.

Comment from audience: there should be customized filters for each person. 

Mary: my Sims project was to filter news by topic communities.

Mike: look at netscape.  They put editors on top, and it's gone flat.  People don't want it.

Mike: ultimately the NYT will filter stuff.  People will trust the brand, but they won't be in the news generation biz.

Jamie  - there's room for both.

Audience:  the difference between quality and popularity - democracy has limitation of trolls.

Mike: that's how democracy works.

Someone in Audience - i read the newspapers for the ads. 

Mike: why?

Someone in Audience - because its useful

Woman from Caterpillar Mobile asks a good question.  Mike pulls up her site invites her to give her card to Oliver from MobileCrunch.

Question: What are the coolest UGC sites?

Mary: Pandora.

Mike - how is that user generated?

Mary - recommendations are based on what people do.

Micki - Vox

Walk through of Micki's Vox Site.

Audience Member summary: def of ugc, will ugc win against pro media, what is the magic formula towards creating a community.

Mary: every community has its own formula.  needs to be open and let people express themself.

Micki: transparency required.  Money making, being honest about things work, TOS that benefit the user.

Question: how do you prevent gaming?

Jack / Yardbarker: example, somebody gamed us.  Community chimed in, commented.  The guy ended up apologizing to everyone.

Rob Hayes, First Round Capital - I don't know if you can say "i'm going to build a community."  That's not how it works.  You give tools, and people use the tools.  Then the community grows out.

Can you set out to build a community? 

Friendster - built in order to meet friends of friends.  Now it's about content.

End.

No Dodgeball Widget? No Matter.

I find it odd that Dodgeball is not yet offering a widget.  It's the right tech demographic, and those using Dodgeball are exhibitionist enough to want to put their check-ins out there for the world to see.  Furthermore, Google seems to be embracing widgets via Google Gadgets.  What gives?

I took my Dodgeball History RSS Feed and plugged into the SpringWidget RSS Reader and presto - I have a Dodgeball widget.

You can check it out in the left sidebar.

Snocap Keynote at Play Conference

Rusty Rueff, CEO of SNOCAP, just gave the keynote at the Berkeley Play Conference.  As widgets are at the heart of Snocap's vision of a distributed music shopping network in which consumers purchase directly from musicians via Snocap widgets, I thought it might be interesting to Sexy Widget readers.

It's very "keynotey" - in fact, Rusty never mentions the word widget - but I think it's an excellent example of one company's high level, widget enabled vision.

This is paraphrased:

"I was recently reminded of how the way we consume media has changed radically while travelling.  Terrestrial radio, zune, ipod, Tivo Carson Daly from last week.  Checked Weeds MySpace page to find the name of an artist.

It's a major transformation.  The means of distribution have been turned upside down down.  Billions of digital media items are created, people can get it where, when, how they want it.

Tech is meeting people's access and distr. needs of media for artists.  Bouncing from various MySpace profiles, to being friended, and then buying the music from the artist.  The gap between fans and artists is narrowing.

Close the gap between content creators and consumers.  New technologies are making it possible.  Golden, no platinum, age of info and data.

The age of relevance.

When the content matches a user's needs and wants.  When they know me, and I know them.

Originally: one to many.  Limited by one way technology.

Until 1983, only local content.   USA Today changed that.

Used to be 3 or 4 networks.

Delivered at whim of publishers.

I used to be a DJ.  I tried to introduce my friends to music.  I was nudged by record companies.

It was a one way street.  If they didn't like my music, they could turn it off, but not many other options.

Moved to Many to Few.

Late 90's communities was the key.  Forums, chat rooms, sharing.  It was better, but to hear music you had to turn on the radio. 

Relevance of info is going up.  But still needed to hunt for the way to bring the creator and the fan together. 

The relatives of one to one.

If you want to hear music, you can go to Pandora.  I know who i like, and others are introduced to me.

Last.FM, Soundflavor, Mog, working to know me. 

iTunes led the way with music on demand.  Rhapsody provides all you can eat.

Now everyone can be relevant.  Enabled by tools where you buy anywhwere you can post html (html widget).  Buy, one click, directly form the band, on any social network.

Todo, we are not at Tower Records any more.

Social networking is how people experience and share content, with no middlemen.

Information is more enjoyable and valuable, as it's on their own terms.

Artists can participate in a world where they can have relevance with their audience.

Some are predicting end of labels, end of mega stars.  Will they go away?  Absolutely not.

Music market needs hit makers.  We need powerful, capitalized hit leaders.  They have be seen as role models and inspirations.  Without stars, we run a risk of the next gen of kids playing video games instead of guitars.

Hits should blow up faster in new world.

New age of relevance, more artists will be able to create hits.  Will be able to connect with their audience.  Relevance exists where creators and fans can have a relationship.

Millions of consumers are not limited to hundreds of albums.  Barriers have been smashed.  Creator no longer has to sell to millions to be relevant.

MySpace; one band named Fletch with 600k visits.  MySpace sole distribution.  NOt mega stars, not hitmakers.  THis band can raise an audience one fan at a time.

In order for it to work, creators and fans must have needs met.

hundreds of millions of fans interacting with tens of millions of content.

Five things you need in hte biz industry:

1) know what the file is, what is being uploaded.  is it ripped off content, or new stuff.
2) who is the owner of the file so the copyright can be protected.  Capitalism works when art is rewarded. 
3) what are the biz rules regarding sale of file?   creators must have ways to set the rules, and monetize.  Biz rules must be dynamic and be able to be reset on the fly. 
4) Have a way to add new files / content.  Millions of new pieces of music every day.  We must support this.
5)  Owners must be able to ID and cliam their old files.  22M unclaimed pieces of content.  They need to be converted for sale.

Relevance Demands Freedom of Access

Without barriers, across platforms.  If creators are to be relevant, they need to be able to access their content in the way they want it.

Accesss means choice.  Important choices are being made that will shape the industry.

Take down is not the answer.  Denial of freedom of access. Content availability needs to be increased.  Access needs to go up.  Take down is loss for everyone, loss of opportunity to make money and consume media.

Consumers must supply their own demand.  I supply my own demand.  Generation of consumers tired of being pushed to. 

What must we do?

1) protect ownership of content creators
2) make it ALL accessible.  It can't be private.  If we don't deliver legal ways, illegal will take it's place.
3) bulld out the intersection of fans and artists.  Fans as friends.  Feedback loop.

Thank you notes for sales, concert alerts.  Show the note from MyApace musician friend, get back stage pass.

Before you can be a fan, you need to find the band.  Ultimate recommendation engine is what your friend is telling you.

Friends suggesting bands to other friends.  Intersection of creators and fans.  Bringing together creation and ability to consume creation.

Michael Eisner: creation and consumption have been moving together for 40 years, but it never arrived.  It's coming now.

Can imagine fan feedback in recording studio stage.

Will increase discovery of music, and monetization.

SNOCAP will close the divide between music fans and musicians, eliminating the middleman, and ensuring copyrights are protected."

ChipIn Widget – A Review

ChipIn is another of that new class of service providers whose business is their widget, and whose widget is their business.  As explained in GigaOM, ChipIn is a distributed fund raising tool that allows publishers to create custom widgets that facilitate money raising and tracking against a goal.  ChipIn is a Flash-based widget so it works with each of the major social networking sites and blogging platforms.

Applications & Opportunity

Fund raising is often a grass roots activity.  As such, it would seem that the practice of fund raising would be a perfect fit for a distributed, widgetized approach.  By distributing the promotion and tracking tools required to conduct an effective fundraise across all of the supporters of a given cause / event,  ChipIn’s widget-based system puts better tools in the hands of those who drive the results.

So where could something like this be helpful?  In addition to the no-brainers like raising cash for disaster relief and charity pledge drives, ChipIn seems like it might be a useful tool for unconferences and other sponsor driven activities to distribute the fundraising efforts.  For example, friends of mine Chris Heuer and Kristie Wells recently organized the Web 2.2 conference here in San Francisco.  As this was a grass roots effort, they relied heavily on friends to promote the event to potential sponsors via their blogs.  This process might have gone more smoothly with a distributed cash collection tool like ChipIn.

Another friend of mine just raised a bunch of money for Hodgkin’s Disease by running in a half marathon.  The fund raising process was conducted via email and PayPal, with no dynamic way to track progress towards her goal.  Additionally, there was no easy way for her friends to get involved with the fund raising process.  Again, ChipIn would have been a perfect tool.

Configuration & Testing

There’s really no way to miss the configuration tool on ChipIn – it’s displayed prominently on the home page for not logged in users.  ChipIn wisely sucks the user in by allowing them to start configuring their widget before prompting them for registration information.

The configuration tool is simple and well laid out.  The publisher submits a widget title and description, chooses from six pre-set dimensions, and selects from five background colors.  A real time preview of the widget is provided in the margin.

The publisher than selects an output destination for the widget from the usual suspects that generates the snippet of code required to embed the widget.

ChipIn does a nice job of providing customized implementation instructions for each destination site. I had no problems implementing the ChipIn widget into TypePad or MySpace.

The widget itself is attractive, and offers four tabs: a “progress” tab that tracks progress against the goal, a “share” tab that allows readers to grab the embed code, a “description” tab, and an “about ChipIn” tab.  By using tabs, Chipin is able to fit a lot of functionality and content into a small amount of real estate.  More importantly, they have the critical viral and branding components well covered.

Editorial

This is a nicely executed widget.  The grass roots nature of fund raising makes a widget strategy entirely appropriate, and nothing feels forced about this implementation.  The configuration tool is easy to use, and ChipIn goes to great lengths to provide detailed implementation instructions for each of the major widget aggregator platforms.

The Flash-based widget makes nice use of tabs, and does a nice job of executing the viral and branding functions of the widget.

My only beef with this service is that they are not yet making other people’s widgets available on their Web site.  While they are currently featuring one widget on their home page, there is no directory that would allow me to browse other widgets.  Providing this functionality would be as simple as offering a “make my widget public” option in the configuration tool.

In the world of user-generated widgets, I see it as a missed opportunity not to leverage the network effect.  Furthermore, making other people’s widgets available to the community could represent a barrier to entry – without this aspect, I don’t see anything to prevent a bigger player with more access to traffic to easily create an equally compelling product.

Clearspring

A while back, I speculated that Feedburner would eventually look to join the widget aggregator ranks:

The new crop of widget aggregators like Widgetbox, Snipperoo, and Google Gadgets seems to be completely focused at the moment on the delivery and promotion aspects of widgets.  Making it easier for folks to use widgets, and helping developers / publishers get the word out about their widgets.

This is great, but it’s only part of the puzzle – monetization and analytics are also extremely important.

So that brings me back to Feedburner.  Nobody has done a better job of providing value at all steps along a blogger’s development process. They have built a distributed ad network.  They have sophisticated, distributed analytics tools.  They know the aggregation business.

Well, someone else has apparently been moving towards building a platform for all stages of the widget life cycle.  Yesterday, Hooman Radfar announced funding for his start up Clearspring in what appears to be an attempt to apply Feedburner's model to the widget space.  Says Pete Cashmore:

The quick way to describe Clearspring is “Feedburner for Widgets”, but really the service breaks down into three elements: converting your content into widget form, publishing those widgets to multiple platforms and widget galleries, and providing tools to analyze the spread of those widgets.

The only thing missing from the Feedburner formula would be the monetization piece, and I would imagine that Hooman and co. have something in the works for that as well.

And the plot thickens even more.  Feedburner took a baby step towards the widget space yesterday by announcing a partnership with FIM to distribute its feeds through the SpringWidgets platform.

The stakes in the widget aggregator space are big.  If someone is able to do with widgets what Google has done with ads through Google AdSsense, they will have a say in how content gets distributed in the widgified web.  The primary players to date in the Web widget aggregator space are: SpringWidgets (web and desktop), Snipperoo, Google (web and desktop), Widgetbox, MuseStorm, and now Clearspring.  Will Feedburner jump full throttle into the mix?  Will Yahoo! and MSN launch a web widget platform to complement their desktop widget systems?

It should be a fun couple of months as things start to take shape.

Web 2.2 Conference

What a great week for conferences.  Today was Widgets Live and later this week is Web 2.2.  For those bootstrappers who enjoy discussing social media with those who live and breathe this stuff - and who feel like they can find more productive uses for the $3K+ it costs to go to the Web 2.0 summit -  Web 2.2 is the event for you.

I'm hopeful that we can get some critical mass for a discussion of what the next generation of widgets will look like.

It looks like it is going to be a great group.